After having read a piece that someone wrote regarding the rollup pool being horrible, I have to agree and will echo their sentiments here. After having viewed many DA replacements lately, all that I can say is that there are too many poor WIT/WILL combos out there. This is an area that can definitely use some improvement.

I recently returned after a five year break. After sending some guys off to the DA and receiving crap back, I was tempted to bail out on the game again. And I'm certain that many others have done so due to the frustration associated with the Dark Arena or simply purchasing crappy rollup sheets.

I'm not advocating drastic changes, but simply an effort by RSI to improve the quality of the pool. I also have no issues with the Dark Arena fees (RSI has to make money), but it would certainly feel like a better investment if the rollups returned to me were decent.

This would also boost participation in Basic. I cannot see how it would not... In particular with some very fierce competition looming out there in AD for new and old players alike. Give the guys in Basic some hope!

DrakeMaster Poster

Joined: Oct 27, 2002
Posts: 249
Location: St. Louis, MO

Posted:
Mon Oct 23, 2006 5:47 am

Caesar wrote:

After sending some guys off to the DA and receiving crap back, I was tempted to bail out on the game again. And I'm certain that many others have done so due to the frustration associated with the Dark Arena or simply purchasing crappy rollup sheets.

This has been one of the primary factors in the two previous hiatuses (5 years & 2 years respectively) I took from the game. I'd just get fed up with good warriors dying only to be replaced by crappy roll-ups. Both times I had a long string of garbage replacements. I would not be surprised if this were the first or second most common reason for quitting the game.

The sad part is, we don't have to fill the RU database with potential TC candidates. Just reduce the number of RUs that start with Wit + Will <= 14.

_________________Deric (Drake) Page
Currently MIA
Playing since 1988 (North Fork turn 10)
Known primarily for being a wise-ass
****
Success is not the result of spontaneous combustion. You have to set yourself on fire. - Unknown

blackstormArchMaster Poster

Joined: May 07, 2006
Posts: 1393
Location: Close enough to GREENLAND to watch it melt.

Posted:
Mon Oct 23, 2006 5:57 am

every one except one( )of my last years replacement have been SZ 15+ with EITHER a workable WT or WL but never the 2, and I wont get into the DF of these guys. You can make only so many BA's and ST's before getting fed up.

dark arena replacements are randomly generated , but the criteria used is just crap , we'd be better off with a pool of a 3 or 400 replacements cycling Thru , or rewrite the program so that every rollup generted has some redeeming quality

to get this all the time just sucks

15-10-15-6-9-10-5

not every rollup needs to be a flawless rollup the design is'nt even that important its the luck inherant to a warrior that makes him good or bad anyway , most even great rollups are only average warriors in todays game anyway .

there should be a rerason to run the rollup some way to design it to do so or at the very least a lot less dark arena bait , which is why i started the consolidatiuon thread in the first place , people flat out quit the game when they get tired of recieving crappy replacemnets .

warriors of any size can be fun to run even 21 though its mostly the suck

i will not run this

10-9-21-7-8-8-7

but i would run this
10-5-21-12-9-8-5

why because it actually can learn

i'm not advocating making every single rollup viable but something has got to be done to fix this , its the biggest real problem in the game and the main reason we lose so many people

a simple fix roll size , roll wit and will ( put in a parameter that wit +wil must = 17 or reroll ) roll the rest of the numbers in a random diminishing order so sometimes you get big speed sometimes df or cn or str etc , at least almost every rollup would have a reasonable chance of being something worth rolling up if it sucks after you roll it up its still your choice to da it , but at least you had a chance .

as it stands now the only way to get warriors is to buy rollups , becasue it is more cost effectivce than the dark arena

guardian

_________________im guardian who the f... are you !.

Last edited by guardian on Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:34 pm; edited 1 time in total

ReaperAdvanced Expert Poster

Joined: Sep 16, 2006
Posts: 109
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Posted:
Mon Oct 23, 2006 7:10 pm

Caesar,

I agree since I have been back it has been rough.
I am trying to fill out some old teams to 5.
Kind of like which team is going to get back to a good group of 5 first.
I don't like dumping a team just because of a bad string of RU luck.
At the same time once you get 3 unstable slots it is hard not to start thinking about it.

I am not sure what could be done. It is kind of what makes killing someone's prized prospect/warrior so savory. It takes a while to get back. Otherwise basic would be less fun, at least to me.

Maybe something like a free DA after every "X" turns of trying.
No better chance of a good one, just less $$$$ pain.

R

MaximillianGrandmaster Poster

Joined: Jun 24, 2002
Posts: 964
Location: Kelowna, BC CAN

Posted:
Mon Oct 23, 2006 8:26 pm

guardian wrote:

dark arena replacements are rtandomel y generated , but the criteria used is just crap , wed be better off with a poll of a 3 or 400 replacements cycling thru , or rewrite the program so that every rollup genertaedhas some redeeming quality

to get this all the time just sucks

15-10-15-6-9-10-5

not every rollup needs to be a flawless rollup the design isnt even that important its the luck inherant to a warrior that makes him good or bad anyway , most even great rollups are only average warriors in todays game anyway .

there should be a rerason to run the rollup some way to design it to do so or at the very least an a lot less dark arena bait , which is why i started the consolidatiuon thread in the first place , people flat out quit the game when they get tired of recieving crappy replacemnets .

warriors of any size can be fun to run even 21 though its nostly the suck

i will not run this

10-9-21-7-8-8-7

but i would run this
10-5-21-12-9-8-5

why b ecause it actually can learn

im not advocating making every singel rollup viable but something has got to be done to fix this , its the biggest real problem in the game and the main reason we lose so many people

a simple fix roll size , roll wit and will ( put in a paramete that wit +wil must = 17 or reroll ) roll the rest of the numbers in a random diminishing order so sometimes you get big speed sometimes df or cn or str etc , at least almost every rollup would have a reasonable chance of being something worth rolling up if it sucks after you roll it up its still your choice to da it , but at least you had a chance .

as it stands now the only way to get warriors is to buy rollups , becasue it is more cost effectivce than the dark arena

guardian

I think this is a very good idea, not many drawbacks that I can see. They gotta start doing something to save thier ass. This is one non-invasive to start.

I gotta disagree with this, I think the pool is just bigger. Otherwise you would of heard of a natural 21 wt,wl,df. Or some other real uber dyo type. With the numbers of these things generated you woulda seen one or two of these.

They are the same crapy rollups as always, its what an average player will accept as runable that has changed. But I gotta agree, even slightly better rollups would be helpful. Besides, you pay 2x as much for the da replacements(vs team sheets), wouldnt hurt to get a better quality replacements.

guardianAdvanced Master Poster

Joined: Nov 05, 2002
Posts: 334

Posted:
Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:42 pm

well , considering the guy that programmed it told me pip , at lunch in tempe a few years back i tend to believe it , its just not programmed correctly , and it would be pretty easy to ensure a trip 21 was never rolled up ,

and if i am remebering correctly , lee did confirm it a few years ago when we asked whty there were suddenly so many larger replacement rollups .

i am pretty sure there is a pool for teamsheets as i bought 120 a cpl years ago and got dupes at the end , but dark arena replacements are(again im pretty sure ) randomly genmerated for the past 3-4 years

guardian

try as yo u might be as patient as you want yoou simply cannot get good replacements , i dark arenad in one arena 3-4 warriors every turn for a year never got squat , the way the rollups are generated is most likely done in order st-df with that said the odds of ever seeing a 21 df after getting a 21 wit or will are pretty slim , df on replacement rollups is definatelyy lower than it was a in the 90's , and i have (not for lack of trying ) not seen many warriors i used to get quite regularly in a long time

_________________im guardian who the f... are you !.

DenAdvanced Expert Poster

Joined: Aug 16, 2003
Posts: 140
Location: Osceola, WI

Posted:
Wed Oct 25, 2006 3:22 pm

In my brief return, I must agree that the DA replacements are horrible compared to what was received in the 80's & 90's. Very frustrating and should be fixed to give us an opportunity to continue playing basic. Put me down for one "yes" vote.

The ConsortiumArchMaster Poster

Joined: Nov 23, 2002
Posts: 8976
Location: on the golf course, in the garden, reading, traveling, and now Consulting

Posted:
Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:08 am

We both agree and disagree with the many points made on rollups:

1. Yes, it would be nice to have "better quality" rollups. Who could want worse ones?
2. No, we do not believe arena replacements are "worse" than they used to be in the 80's or whenever. (We have some good experience in this area, having been receiving them almost consistently for 20+ years.
3. Yes, we agree the expectation for the rollup quality are now higher. Most of that can be attributed to tournament play.

The needs and wants of "tournament players" (we place great managers like Guardian in this class) are somewhat different than the needs and wants of the arena players. (we place ourselves more in that class) The advent of tournaments (remember, we have defined the winter FTF as the "most important ambiance" in the game) and especially the prizes has changed the game, almost making it two types of games under one heading.

We would not like to see one deemphasized any more at the cost of the other.

1. Yes, it would be nice to have "better quality" rollups. Who could want worse ones?
2. No, we do not believe arena replacements are "worse" than they used to be in the 80's or whenever. (We have some good experience in this area, having been receiving them almost consistently for 20+ years.
3. Yes, we agree the expectation for the rollup quality are now higher. Most of that can be attributed to tournament play.

The needs and wants of "tournament players" (we place great managers like Guardian in this class) are somewhat different than the needs and wants of the arena players. (we place ourselves more in that class) The advent of tournaments (remember, we have defined the winter FTF as the "most important ambiance" in the game) and especially the prizes has changed the game, almost making it two types of games under one heading.

We would not like to see one deemphasized any more at the cost of the other.

1 2 3 I agree with ya.

But I think that here is one point where the needs/wants of tourney players are the same as the arena players. Tourney players would like better replacements from the da, so they can keep multiple guys on their teams. Alot of these teams would be active in an arena; arena players would like more teams in the arenas(and I doubt you'd hear any complaints about the replacements).

We're not even talking about all the replacements being uber, just a slightly better draw would be helpful(to everyone). Even if they switch it so you could add max 7, that would convert a decent % of warriors to runable.

Think of all the 1 warrior teams with the only runable guy with 5,11,or 14ish fe, most of these warriors will never run again. If there was a hope for getting a good replacent, some of these might become good teams.

Say I have a warrior with 13 fe, and 4 0fe puds. I can run the whole team till he's timed and get 28 replacements from daing(maybe get 1 or 2 decent replacements), or I can run him solo for 35, and get 7 sheets, and get maybe 5 guys. Or better yet I can run him as a loser in 3 tourneys and then fight 1 turn in the arena = 26 bucks(21 if you manage a 3fe tourney). So I can do up 2 of these guys and get almost 4 sheets for the price of running the full team. All while contributing absolutely 0 to the basic game. If I was running the whole team I probly wouldn't do it in 82. I might even participate in the arena(after all, pissing people off gets you more lopsided fe challenges which usually equal more skills).

Might sound like give me more for my tourney dollar, but you're really just moving money from sheets to basic arena; and it should benefit the arenas.

The overall cost to rsi is small, nothing compared to the removal of the 3 fights before the tourney thing. That alone removed a huge amount of basic play. But then again, maybe the ladies would like to consolodate as much of the work as they can to the 4 tourneys.

And what has been a major complaint of arena managers for years now? My warrior stock just can't compete with the guys who buy sheets and run one man teams.

DrakeMaster Poster

Joined: Oct 27, 2002
Posts: 249
Location: St. Louis, MO

Posted:
Thu Oct 26, 2006 4:23 am

The Consortium wrote:

We both agree and disagree with the many points made on rollups:

1. Yes, it would be nice to have "better quality" rollups. Who could want worse ones?
2. No, we do not believe arena replacements are "worse" than they used to be in the 80's or whenever. (We have some good experience in this area, having been receiving them almost consistently for 20+ years.
3. Yes, we agree the expectation for the rollup quality are now higher. Most of that can be attributed to tournament play.

The needs and wants of "tournament players" (we place great managers like Guardian in this class) are somewhat different than the needs and wants of the arena players. (we place ourselves more in that class) The advent of tournaments (remember, we have defined the winter FTF as the "most important ambiance" in the game) and especially the prizes has changed the game, almost making it two types of games under one heading.

We would not like to see one deemphasized any more at the cost of the other.

Well, I hardly think I qualify as a "tournament player" but even I think the quality of replacement roll-ups is seriously laking (though not neccessarily worse than it used to be). The number of times I've gotten replacements that start with both Wit & Will under 9 (so neither stat can reach a 15) are beyond my ability to count and I suspect higher than they would be if RU generation were truly random.

I don't think anyone here is looking for a RU pool that will significantly increase the number of tourney-viable warriors. I'd just like an increase in the number of RUs that are arena worthy and I don't use the DA that often. I get tired of those times where I get a half-dozen crappy replacements in a row. And just so we're clear, to me a crappy RU is one where neither Wit nor Will can reach a 15. I'll run a 13/15 or 15/13 in the arena; sometimes even 11/15 or 15/11 but there have been times when even those RUs are rare.

A true RU generation program would not be difficult to program. Heck, I did one years ago just to play around with different design strategies. The logic looks like this:

Each stat starts at 3 (takes up 21 points leaving 43).
A loop is run 43 times {
* Generate a random number between 1 & 7
* Add 1 point to the corresponding stat (1 = STR, 7 = DFT)
* If that stat is > 21, remove the point & re-roll
}

This should give a truly random distribution of stats with no one stat having any greater chances of starting high/low than any other. You should actually see fewer extremes (on both the high & low end) with this system than what you get out of the current RU system.

After this, it would be easy to put in a check:
If Wit + Wil < 16 then discard RU & regenerate.

If people would like, I can generate some sample numbers from the above code and post the results so you can evaluate what a sampling of such RUs would look like.

_________________Deric (Drake) Page
Currently MIA
Playing since 1988 (North Fork turn 10)
Known primarily for being a wise-ass
****
Success is not the result of spontaneous combustion. You have to set yourself on fire. - Unknown

DekeAdvanced Master Poster

Joined: Aug 15, 2006
Posts: 390
Location: Atlanta Georgia Area

Posted:
Thu Oct 26, 2006 5:33 am

A "Snowfall" method is good, but 43 rotations of adding 1 will result in too few rollups with values below 5 or above 15.

A "Snowfall" method is good, but 43 rotations of adding 1 will result in too few rollups with values below 5 or above 15.

Yep. That's actually one of the things I was going for. I'm of the oppinion that exceptional warriors should actually be exceptional. Still, I can see how not everyone would like that. I know most folks don't want to run the average warrior.

Yep. This method also has the advantage of less computational time. Of course, that's only likely to matter right before a tourney (especially a FtF).

_________________Deric (Drake) Page
Currently MIA
Playing since 1988 (North Fork turn 10)
Known primarily for being a wise-ass
****
Success is not the result of spontaneous combustion. You have to set yourself on fire. - Unknown

guardianAdvanced Master Poster

Joined: Nov 05, 2002
Posts: 334

Posted:
Thu Oct 26, 2006 3:17 pm

consortium crew

i can say with absolute certainty that the average size of replacement warriors is significantly higher now than it was in the mid 90's the rollup generator deliberately causes it , the distribution is based around what i consider to be the wrong numbers , (but that is just personal opinion)

which results in to many sz 15-16 warriors because they are in the same distribution pool as 8-14 , so the number of warriors rolled up from dark arena bouts is roughly the same for sizes -8-16 , with sizes above and below that some diminishing number .

whereas before there was just a static pool and so many of each size in the pool .

if the program was even changed to move sz-15 and 16 into the pool for 17-21 it would make a huge difference

to say exactly what the percentages are i admit i cannot i can only tell you that sz 15 and 16 are as likely as sz 8-14 and they shouldn't be .

the Numbers are of course just my opinion but something along these lines would indicate the program was distributing the sizes correctly

and a lot more than 2-20 are sz 15 -16 and i seriously doubt even 1 in 20 is sz 21 with the data i have from the last 100 dark arenas the only sizes that seem to come up way to much are 15 -16

now i don't really care how it gets fixed , i can only say it needs to be fixed in some manner , and i honestly believe that fixing it will help the arena game More than it will the tourney game , and i honestly hope that it does .

the endless daing without getting rollups i consider fun to run is what always drive me back to being a tourney manager , i don't need godlings i just want to be able to field a team of 5 interesting guys without having to spend hundreds of dollars on the dark arena , the dark arena gives me 0 value for my dollar , in America we generally consider that a bad investment . and clearly your a lot more patient than i am to put up with it as much as you do (which in it's own right is quite commendable )

drake the thing that makes rollups fun , interesting or challenging is when you have some weird set up that actually can be fun to run because it has some redeeming quality and the rollups do need those distributions below 5 and above 15 so you can get the 3 coupled with a 21 to make some of the more interesting designs in the game .